MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985921229 · doi:10.1108/ijmhsc-06-2013-0012

Neither here nor there? Place and placemaking in the lives of separated children

2013· article· en· W1985921229 on OpenAlexaffabout
Myriam Denov, Bree Akesson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Migration Health and Social Care · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlacemakingMeaning (existential)SociologyIdentity (music)OriginalityValue (mathematics)Place attachmentSense of placeHuman geographyRefugeePlace identityAestheticsSocial psychologyPsychologyUrban designSocial sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringCivil engineeringLawUrban planningComputer scienceArtQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Of the approximate 18 million refugees worldwide, between 2 and 5 percent are estimated to be separated children, a figure which represents between 360,000 and 900,000 children. Place and placemaking represent vital components and realities during flight. The concept of place addresses the physical and social environments within which separated children move through and live in. Place and placemaking both include elements of physical setting, activity, and meaning, with placemaking specifically constituting the act of transforming the places one finds oneself into the places in which one lives. Originality/value Uncertainty continues to surround the concept and meaning of place and placemaking in large part due to their contextual and subjective nature. Furthermore, the notion of place is often under‐explored and under‐theorized when considering separated children's experiences and realities. Design/methodology/approach Drawing upon in‐depth interviews and a focus group with 17 youth respondents living in Canada, this paper explores the realities of place and placemaking in the lives of separated children. Findings The paper highlights the meaning and significance of place during flight. It examines the ways in which respondents “made place” in contexts of violence and insecurity through social networks, through reliance on language and cultural traditions, and through place attachment and identity. Practical implications The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications of place and placemaking for policy and practice with separated children.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.022
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Migration Health and Social CareSame topicPlace Attachment and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207